'Social Network' scribe 'strongly considering' Steve Jobs movie

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 46
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post


    Let's just agree to disagree on this one.



    I don't think we are even arguing with the same basic assumptions so there is no possibility for this to come to any reasonable conclusion.



    I would argue that you are conflating "popular" with "good," and thus will never agree with me that Sorkin isn't actually so much a good dramatic writer, as he is a popular writer of historical psuedo-dramas.



    I don't agree that "popular" equals "good." Therefore we won't really ever agree on this.



    Sorkin was a good dramatic writer on the west wing and A Few Good Men (though the ending with the salute in the courtroom was cliched)...



    Also his work on Sports Night while not at all popular was in fact good
  • Reply 22 of 46
    cpsrocpsro Posts: 2,475member
    Sorkin will start working on the script right after he finishes Steve's commencement speech.
  • Reply 23 of 46
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post


    If Aaron Sorkin was one of my country's "greatest screenwriters," I would be ashamed.



    He is a workman like guy who does a good job with pseudo-historical re-enactment drama.



    None of his movies and shows are anything special. They aren't bad, but they aren't Oscar material or anything.

    In the 70's he'd be the guy penning all those "movies of the week" on whatever the issue of the day was at the time.



    I for one, totally agree with you, I didn't find any of his work special, and I found Social Network to be on the boring side.
  • Reply 24 of 46
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,511member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by NormM View Post


    I thought the biography was pretty bad. It was mainly human interest gossip about an eccentric fellow, when the real story should have been the passion, insight and abilities that let Jobs accomplish so much. Kind of like a book about music by someone who is tone deaf. I hope the script is only loosely based on this book.



    First, that's a clever analogy -- 'a book about music by somebody who is tone deaf' -- and I know what you mean, but I don't think it applies to Isaacson's book. By the way, I think the book is great for what it intends to be, which should be clear in the following.



    I've been wondering about readers like you and most famously John Siracusa, who seem to be deaf to what Isaacson gives us about the "passion, insight and abilities that let Jobs accomplish so much." I think you are missing it because you can't imagine -- or relate to through experience -- the baptism into the mysteries of deep vision that Jobs went through early in his life. And you skip over these passages mentally and don't put them into the foreground or background of your Jobs picture.



    You know what I'm talking about, yes? Isaacson sympathetically reports on Jobs's self-indoctrination without enlarging on the significance for you, but I sense that he, Isaacson, was either a fellow traveller or a genuine LSD immolate himself, in order for him to report without the slightest trace of judgment. The best passage bears repeating, p. 41 of the hardcover, in the chapter "Dropout."



    "I came of age at a magical time," [Jobs] reflected later. "Our consciousness was raised by Zen and also by LSD. . . . Taking LSD was a profound experience, one of the most important things in my life. . . . It reinforced my sense of what is important -- creating great things instead of making money, putting things back into the stream of history and of human consciousness as much as I could."



    Throughout the book, Isaacson refuses to editorialize, except in a few embarrassing instances that stand out by their rarity and are noted by Siracusa on "5by5." It's up to us to draw the conclusions. There are only four references to LSD in the book's weak index. I wrote down six more, some that include "acid" (pp. 31, 33, 58, 93, 142, 384, plus one on Ram Dass, p.34, which might as well be about LSD, since that is what got Richard Alpert to go to India and become Ram Dass. And Steve to go to India, and the whole culture of the 60s and 70s to get out of the tyranny of the rectilinear cubicle culture of the 50s and into the liberating visions of the computer as bicycles for the mind. Read What the Dormouse Said, if you haven't already.



    Jobs's vision of deep aesthetics, deep simplicity and changing the world all derive from the psychedelic vision that has been under prohibition for lo these many years. You guys don't have to undergo the baptism, maybe, but you have to make a mental effort to understand it and place it in historical context, because you benefit by it every time you pick up your iPhone. Not your Android phone, your iPhone.



    If only Bill had . . . no don't go there. Anyway, not to single you out so much, I'm really taking about a general tone deafness to the countercultural background that includes the Siracusas and even the Grubers out there who are short selling this very important book.



    Edit: Maybe something on topic: I wonder how, in fact I dread, how they're going to handle all the tripping in the movie. And the confusions drawn therefrom. Edit 2: I meant "conclusions," but maybe the autocorrect got it better. Edit 3: Caution! In those times, there was a whole supportive stream of consciousness that doesn't exist now. You could get through difficult moments of a trip by drawing on all sorts "Let It Be" messages embedded in the music and the folklore that surrounded you. Not so now. You gotta look for your friendly local shaman or trip partner. And mushrooms are probably more trustworthy these days.
  • Reply 25 of 46
    paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,607member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bloggerblog View Post


    I for one, totally agree with you, I didn't find any of his work special, and I found Social Network to be on the boring side.



    Sorkin is a dialogue guy. He is also a 'hot' and respected writer. And he clearly is very intelligent.



    But any writer who likes character driven drama would seriously consider an offer to write the SJ story. The man was all character and drama and a screen writer's dream protagonist.
  • Reply 26 of 46
    It will be a challange to take Jobs' life and narrow it down to about 2 hours.



    Early life 15 minutes

    Start Up Apple 20 minutes

    Meteoric rise of Apple 15 minutes

    Fired from Apple 10 minutes

    Next, Pixar, Disney years 15 minutes

    Return to Apple 10 minutes

    Family life 15 minutes

    Ipod, Iphone, Ipad 15 minutes

    Illness and death 15 minutes
  • Reply 27 of 46
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post


    My point was kind of the opposite of that. *Sorkin* is actually "all about the facts."



    Hardly, here is quote from a Sorkin interview he did with the New Yorker...

    Quote:

    ?I don?t want my fidelity to be to the truth; I want it to be to storytelling,?.....



    I liked the "Social Network,", it was an entertaining movie, but it missed the truth by a wide margin. His concern is not facts but entertainment. The only reason he might be wanted for a movie about jobs is because the "Social Network" did well financially and hey, if you can write one tech movie you can write them all.



    Sorkin would be a horrible choice if you want the facts. On the other hand, if you prefer an entertaining fictionalized story about Steve Jobs, then he's your man.



    -kpluck
  • Reply 28 of 46
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by alphajack7 View Post


    It will be a challange to take Jobs' life and narrow it down to about 2 hours.



    Early life 15 minutes

    Start Up Apple 20 minutes

    Meteoric rise of Apple 15 minutes

    Fired from Apple 10 minutes

    Next, Pixar, Disney years 15 minutes

    Return to Apple 10 minutes

    Family life 15 minutes

    Ipod, Iphone, Ipad 15 minutes

    Illness and death 15 minutes



    LOL you're right it does seem ridiculous!!! Ipod, Iphone, Ipad 15 minutes!!! Looks like SJ had his 15 minutes of fame...about 10 times.
  • Reply 29 of 46
    paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,607member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by alphajack7 View Post


    It will be a challange to take Jobs' life and narrow it down to about 2 hours.



    Early life 15 minutes

    Start Up Apple 20 minutes

    Meteoric rise of Apple 15 minutes

    Fired from Apple 10 minutes

    Next, Pixar, Disney years 15 minutes

    Return to Apple 10 minutes

    Family life 15 minutes

    Ipod, Iphone, Ipad 15 minutes

    Illness and death 15 minutes



    And there you'd have his complete life chronologically listed in the most boring movie ever made...



    I think you'd need to make some choices before you set out making this movie.
  • Reply 30 of 46
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by alphajack7 View Post


    It will be a challange to take Jobs' life and narrow it down to about 2 hours.



    Early life 15 minutes

    Start Up Apple 20 minutes

    Meteoric rise of Apple 15 minutes

    Fired from Apple 10 minutes

    Next, Pixar, Disney years 15 minutes

    Return to Apple 10 minutes

    Family life 15 minutes

    Ipod, Iphone, Ipad 15 minutes

    Illness and death 15 minutes



    Nah. Sorkin didn't waste screen time on the first 22 years of Mark Zuckerburg's life; his movie The Social Network starts more or less around the year he created Facebook, then jumps ahead to the year they are giving depositions for the Winklevoss lawsuit. Sorkin has to find the story of within Steve's life and discard the rest. Otherwise, it would be a documentary series.
  • Reply 31 of 46
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post


    Nah. Sorkin didn't waste screen time on the first 22 years of Mark Zuckerburg's life; his movie The Social Network starts more or less around the year he created Facebook, then jumps ahead to the year they are giving depositions for the Winklevoss lawsuit. Sorkin has to find the story of within Steve's life and discard the rest. Otherwise, it would be a documentary series.



    And that's one of the things I didn't appreciate about Social Network, the timeline confusion, it seems like writers or producers do this to make their movie seem advanced, or "intelligent".
  • Reply 32 of 46
    rainrain Posts: 538member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post


    If Aaron Sorkin was one of my country's "greatest screenwriters," I would be ashamed.



    He is a workman like guy who does a good job with pseudo-historical re-enactment drama.



    None of his movies and shows are anything special. They aren't bad, but they aren't Oscar material or anything.

    In the 70's he'd be the guy penning all those "movies of the week" on whatever the issue of the day was at the time.



    I agree.

    It was pretty obvious that the Academy was bought off to award 'The Social Network' or even acknowledge it. It's a pretty bad movie and rated B by most critics.

    I've tried to get through it a few times but keep getting bored and switch to watching Golden Girls reruns or infomercials.



    I'd like to see M Night Shyamalan or Stephen King take a stab at the movie to add some intrigue.
  • Reply 33 of 46
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 8,684member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by rain View Post


    It's a pretty bad movie and rated B by most critics.

    I've tried to get through it a few times but keep getting bored and switch to watching Golden Girls reruns or infomercials.



    Yep, I too thought that it was not a great movie, and who cares if it won an Academy Award? That doesn't make a movie great. I actually thought that it was a pretty boring movie.



    It seems like people are looking for the Steve Jobs movie to be a sort of Social Network PT. 2. I can't think of anything worse than that actually. That would be extremely lame and not worthy of Steve Job's legacy.
  • Reply 34 of 46
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 7,162member
    Boy, for a bunch of nobodies, we have some pretty self-important, dumbass opinions don't we.
  • Reply 35 of 46
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by NormM View Post


    I thought the biography was pretty bad. It was mainly human interest gossip about an eccentric fellow, when the real story should have been the passion, insight and abilities that let Jobs accomplish so much. Kind of like a book about music by someone who is tone deaf. I hope the script is only loosely based on this book.





    I agree with you!! From the very first I felt it was penned by the wrong writer. I keep telling myself it's just a matter of fact unembellished true story, no hyperbole.



    But the stories chosen for inclusion, and the general lack of sync with the tech world really shows. I think the author was tone deaf to technology. Has he ever even used a Mac anything? You're right, it come across as a few behind the scenes gossip stories about how eccentric Jobs was.



    Maybe someone else will write a new synthesis of his life and it's impact on the world.

    I would want more than that book for source material for a movie script!
  • Reply 36 of 46
    Here's what needs to happen in this biopic. The actual guy needs to be the one who plays himself. Not literally, of course, but visually.



    Motion capture, expression capture and computer texture mapping all need to be used to flesh out the character of Steve Jobs. To make the movie as real for the viewer as the book is for the reader.



    Nothing short of this will do.
  • Reply 37 of 46
    With all the talk about a possible bio pic i was wonder who id want to play Jobs. Noah Wyle has played him on TV though I wasn't too impressed at what I saw. I have to laugh at the suggestion of George Cloney. I can't think of too many that could pull it off however I would suggest that if anyone has the physical presence it would be Jeff Bridges (he probably too old now) or Bradley Cooper who shone in 'Limitless' this year.
  • Reply 38 of 46
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post


    Yours are just rude (shouting) and a tiny bit pretentious (jejune).



    I thought he was just stuttering
  • Reply 39 of 46
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by rain View Post


    I'd like to see M Night Shyamalan or Stephen King take a stab at the movie to add some intrigue.



    M. Night Iamasham shouldn't be allowed within a thousand miles of anything to do with any movie ever again!
  • Reply 40 of 46
    .



    Movie of the Week



    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movie_of_the_week



    .



    What it would probably be



    And, imho, what "Social Network" was



    Aside from a re-make/copy of "Pirates Silicon Valley"



    But merely Facebook instead of Apple



    .



    If want to do justice to Steve Jobs, tell his story ?



    Come back in 50 to 100 years, or more



    His work, and influence on History, has just gotten started



    .



    Change the World?



    .
Sign In or Register to comment.